Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!UTCVM.BITNET!MQUINN From: MQUINN@UTCVM.BITNET Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: A low blow from Apple Message-ID: <9009230630.AA24367@apple.com> Date: 23 Sep 90 04:17:58 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 128 >If it is speed you want, then why not get a 486? 1. I dislike Intel Chips VERY much! 2. It's not compatible with ANYTHING I have. 3. I don't have the money. (Even if I did have the $$, I wouldn't get one.) >if speed is the only issue. It isn't. >Why do people keep bringing up the Amiga? Why do people keep asking this? It's obviously the closest, comparable computer to the GS. It's faster, has better 'supported' graphics and costs LESS!... although, the sound isn't as good, but I don't think that's why the GS is so much more. >There's more to computing than games. Of course. >The other thing you are forgetting when bringing up the Amiga is the quality >of the people who work at Apple. I'm not sure what you mean by 'quality of people'. Anyway, that doesn't change the price or speed of the GS or Amiga. > The GS's OS is just great. Well, it's not bad, but I wouldn't call it great... but I don't like the graphical interface (actually, I don't like not having the choice of a text or graphic interface with GS/OS). > I use and like the Mac. I use and dislike the Mac. Although, I like it's speed. >I really like the GS. So do I. That's why I'm pushing for it to be even better. I'd like it a Heck of alot more if it were as fast as it should be (considering it has a graphical interface.) >Both are way ahead of any other micro OS with wide acceptance that I'm aware >of. Sorry, but there's a heck of alot more messy-dos people than there GS/OS and MAC combined and most of those people (if not all) think that ms-dos is way ahead of any other OS. Although, I personally prefer GS/OS over ms-dos. >The PS/1 may have VGA and a 10Mhz 286, but it doesn't have GS/OS. Yeah, but it has VGA and a 10Mhz 286! AAAAAND for about the same (or less) than the GS! I don't think GS/OS is an excuse for it being slow OR expensive. >I also think Apple is in a position to be extremely competitive in that area, Yeah, IF they speed up the GS and give it VGA comparable graphics. >using both the GS and the Mac. --- They very well could be, but what does that have to do with people wanting a faster GS for their money? The whole point of my message was that for $1000 I can get a 2.8 Mhz GS with OK graphics (ok, compared to other computers that cost $1000) or for ALOT less, I can get a 7Mhz Amiga with even better graphics. (I'm talking about graphics that are supported). >I don't need workstation speed, nor does the GS. I do, but I am neither asking for it, nor am I saying the GS should have it, only that it would be great (of course). But the GS NEEDS to be AT LEAST 7Mhz. When I said, "I don't hink it's possible to have a computer 'too fast'.", I was saying that in reply to this: >I also would love to see a faster( not too fast) GS. because, it sounded like he was saying that there was something wrong with 'speed' in itself, which, of course, there isn't. >We will have to see what Apple has in mind, but many PC "power users" are >unlikely to be happy with the 10Mhz 286 and are probably having the same >conversation we are having here in another forum. What Apple has in mind for the future is irrellevent to the fact that the GS is too slow and too expensive NOW. If they speed it up in the future, without increasing the price, well that's just fine and Jim Dandy, but I'm stil stuck here with my 2.8Mhz GS for $1000 with only 256k on the motherboard. I'm sure that a power user wouldn't be happy with a 10Mhs 286 and NASA wouldn't be happy with a Commodore 64. What does that have to do with the fact that the GS is 2.8Mhz at $1000 and every other computer at that price is MUCH faster than 2.8Mhz. >Also, don't forget that the GS has an excellent OS, networking, a well-defined >SCSI and connections to the Mac wich you won't find with the PS/1. 'excellent OS' is an opinion. There are other people (I'm not one of them) that believe that MS-DOS is an 'excellent OS'. The PS/1 can be networked to other PC's (to the best of my knowledge), an internal HD (SCSI not needed) and connections to the PS/2. I'm not pushing the PS/1... I'd take my GS over a PS/1 anyday, but that's just me. The PS/1 ALSO has VGA graphics, a 10Mhz CPU, a vast library of software, and software support you just won't find for the GS. Also, I don't want to network my GS to a Mac. I don't want to network my GS at all. The GS doesn't NOT have 'well defined SCSI'. That's EXTRA! You have to pay for it. It doesn't come with the $1000 GS, so that doesn't justify the price. Also, so what if it has connections to the Mac? I don't have a Mac and I don't want a Mac and MINE isn't connected to a Mac, so, again, how does that justify the extreme cost and slow speed of the GS? I just think that a computer that sells for $1000 and has a graphical interface should at LEAST be as fast as every other computer in it's PRICE RANGE and have comparable graphics. Also, just about everything you mentioned that the GS has, has to be bought extra. You can buy extra stuff for just about ANY computer (and usually cheaper for the Amiga) that will do everything you mentioned. You talk about Mac compatibility... well, for about $300, you can make an Atari ST Macintosh compatible. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | This is your brain... | BITNET-- mquinn@utcvm | | This is your brain on drugs... | pro-line: | | This is your brain on whole wheat.| mquinn@pro-gsplus.cts.com | |____________________________________|_______________________________|